VE researches transfer of training

Another psychological area in need of research is that of transfer of training (see Champney,
Carroll, Surpris, & Cohn, 2014; Chapter 30). Stanney, Mourant, and Kennedy (1998, p. 330) suggest
that

To justify the use of VE technology for a given task, when compared to alternative approaches, the
use of a VE should improve task performance when transferred to the real-world task because the VE
system capitalizes on a fundamental and distinctively human sensory, perceptual, information processing,
or cognitive capability.

But what leads to such transfer? VEs provide the ability to reconstruct similar conditions to those
in the operational world, which would otherwise be too risky, costly, or cumbersome to reproduce,
which imparts them with high face validity. While face validity is important, there are still limited
data-grounded best practices that can be used to direct the design of VE training solutions such
that they optimize skill acquisition and retention (Burke & Hutchins, 2008). Despite this lack of
knowledge, transfer of training from VEs to real-world tasks has been demonstrated across a range
of applications from simple sensorimotor tasks (Kenyon & Afenya, 1995 [see refuting evidence in
Kozak, Hancock, Arthur, & Chrysler, 1993]; Rose et al., 1998; Rose, Brooks, & Attree, 2002) and
procedural tasks to ones that are more complex, both procedurally (Brooks, Rose, Attree, & ElliotSquare,
2002) as well as cognitively and spatially (Foreman, Stanton, Wilson, & Duffy, 2003).
While these examples demonstrate the potential of achieving training transfer with VE systems,
there is a need for better understanding of the types of tasks or activities for which the unique
characteristics of VEs (i.e., egocentric perspective, stereoscopic 3D visualization, real-time interactivity,
immersion, and multisensory feedback) can be leveraged to provide significant gains in
human performance, knowledge, or experience.